The UN never ceases to amaze. When will decent people realize that the UN now works against all the lofty and noble purposes set forth in its charter? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights promulgated by the UN 62 years ago has long been a dead letter. Yet the stinking zombie corpse of the UN's human rights pretensions, the so-called UN "Human Rights Council", struts and preens in its lair in Geneva, undermining human rights in fact throughout the world. It is dominated by the OIC [organization of the Islamic conference] which in turn denies the very principle of human rights, and instead promotes the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam.

Long ago, Gaglione and Yeselson pointed out that the UN was a "dangerous place" [in their book of that name] where agitation and incitement for war were given free rein. They wrote that the UN had as much to do with peace as a battleship or an atomic bomb. Nothing has changed in the nearly 40 years since they published their book. Let us clearly assert and affirm that the UN and its dominant member states are enemies of peace. Since the "log-rolling" effect of even a large, determined minority in any assembly where votes are counted can be dominant, the UN General Assembly is an enemy of peace. Hence, judging by its opposition to its own stated goals and purposes, peace, human rights, and so on, the UN is not a legitimate body. Only those who are fond of its monumental Orwellian hypocrisy, its turning all its judgments inside out and upside down, could deny that assertion.

The latest UN offense, pointed out by Fiamma Nirenstein, is that the UN removed homosexuality from a list of personal traits for which member states should protect persons from extra-judicial, arbitrary and summary executions on a discriminatory basis. Such traits were ethnic, religious and linguistic belonging, homeless children, homosexuals, etc. The resolution called on member states to protect the right to life of all human beings by investigating these wrongful killings, especially those of the groups just mentioned. Now, a recent amendment to the relevant resolution removes homosexuals from the class of persons who should be protected from such killings by member states. Now since Islam mandates killing homosexuals by Islamic law, and such Muslim states as Saudi Arabia legally practice such executions, etc., this amendment comes as an encouragement for more murder. It is a kind of authorization.

I am aware of course that homosexuality is more prevalent in Islamic lands than in most other places. This is in part because of the degraded and segregated state of women in most Islamic lands. Moreover, some forms of homosexual activity are not recognized as such and are indeed practiced by powerful persons in society and govt. But a charge of homosexuality constitutes one of the weapons that repressive govts in those countries can use against their opposition, whether or not a person accused of homosexuality does in fact practice it.

More important is that the UN is now an enemy of humanity and should be recognized as such, as Fiamma Nirenstein does.- - - - - - - - -UPDATING 12-12-2009 A Washington Post editorial of 1 April 2009 exposes the hypocrisy of Arab League demands that Israel be held accountable for alleged violations of international law. The Arab League session in Doha, Qatar, in March 2009 featured praise and defense of Sudan's Omar al-Bashir, already indicted by the ICC [international criminal court] for war crimes in Darfur, western Sudan. The UN connection is that UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon was present at the Arab League meeting, together with al-Bashir, and did not object to al-Bashir's presence or have anything to say by way of urging the Arab League to urge al-Bashir to turn himself over to the ICC [at least not in public as far as I know]. So it seems that the UN sec'y general shows public contempt for another international body purporting to represent international law. Ban seems to have indirectly referred to the Sudan situation, pleading that "Relief efforts should not become politicized," which was interpreted as a plea to al-Bashir to allow relief agencies to come back to Darfur. This is hardly the same as frankly demanding compliance with the ICC indictment. But no doubt that the Arab League let Ban know ahead of time that he must not support or even mention the ICC indictment, even by insinuation. By appearing at the League's meeting in such an abject manner, Ban lent support to the League's backing for al-Bashir's war crimes.12-19-2010 Bat Yeor talks about the OIC which has a strong grip on the UN [ici in French]. She argues that Islam as a religion wants to impose Muslim law, shari`ah, worldwide and a universal caliphate, and that those are the goals of the OIC [in French OCI].. . .l’islam vise à appliquer la sharîa et à établir le califat, la gouvernance islamique mondiale à la fois politique, religieuse et législative. Tel est le dessein de l’Organisation de la conférence islamique (OCI). . .12-21-2010 Omar al-Bashir, wanted for war crimes by the ICC [international criminal court], is defended by the OIC, & by Arab League. Al-Bashir, "innocent" protege of the UN sec'y general Ban Ki-Moon, of the Arab League & the OIC, promises more shari`ah in Sudan if the South breaks away [here].1-28-2011 How UNRWA collaborates with Hamas -- they staff UNRWA [here]

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Influencing American Foreign Policy -- The Impotence of Jews & Arabs Together

UPDATING links added 12-15-2010

The Wikileaks are telling the broad public some truths that were earlier mainly known only to the very well-informed. Jeffrey Goldberg explains that American foreign policy is made by US officials, although I would not say that policy is necessarily made in the American interest. That interest is itself a matter of interpretation and controversy.

By Jeffrey Goldberg

Here's a fact that might astonish Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, whose book, "The Israel Lobby," posits the existence of a nefarious, all-powerful Jewish lobby that works in direct opposition to American interests: The "Lobby" (they love to capitalize the word, to accentuate its alleged uniqueness) has failed to convince two successive American administrations, one Republican and one Democratic, to attack Iran's nuclear sites. So much for Jewish power.

Here's another fact that might astonish Walt and Mearsheimer: It turns out that the Jewish lobby wasn't even the main lobby working to bring about an attack on Iran. It was, according to the treasure trove of State Department cables released by Wikileaks, the Arab lobby -- whose lead lobbyist is, by the way, the King of Saudi Arabia (which is a big job, since he's also in charge of the world's oil supply) -- that was at the forefront of an intensive, even ferocious, anti-Iran lobbying effort. For Walt and Mearsheimer to acknowledge that the Arab lobby, and not the Jewish lobby, was the prime mover of this issue would mean that they would have to recall their book, and somehow stuff back into a bottle all of the anti-Semitic invective they unleashed in the book's wake. So don't expect an apology anytime soon.

In sum, what we have here is a situation in which all of the Semites in combination have been proven impotent in their attempt to move American foreign policy. Which suggests that American foreign policy might actually be made by Americans. This is definitely a tough week for the neo-Lindberghians.

I'm not sure that Goldberg believes that walt-mearsheimer really believe in what they wrote in their own book called The Israel Lobby. In fact, Mearsheimer himself was interviewed on NPR several years ago and contradicted the claims made by walt & himself in their book, which might better be called a non-book, to use terminology from the 1960s and 1970s. Goldberg would have done better to write: Here's a fact that might astonish walt & mearsheimer if they really believed what they wrote in their book The Israel Lobby.

The revelation discussed by Goldberg is that Arab rulers too, not only Israel, were very concerned by the Iranian nuclear bomb project. This was known long ago and even reported fairly frankly in early 2009 by an Arab reporter with the Associated Press. Maybe the phoney experts on Middle Eastern affairs who proliferate and swarm in the major mass media and the "think tanks" don't read AP reports. Otherwise, why were they so ignorant and misleading?? A Jerusalem Post editorial mentions some of the names: Marc Lynch of Foreign Policy, Robert Dreyfuss of the once rational The Nation, and of course walt-mearsheimer. There are many more lesser and greater lights who reiterated the same silliness.

Getting back to Goldberg's point that the influence of the Semites in Washington, of Jews and Arabs taken either separately or together, was not enough to move Washington to a really firm policy against the Iranian Bomb, a policy not ruling out military action, as several Arab rulers called for, what do we conclude. First of all, the actual US policy was made by Americans, not Arabs or Jews or both, and not necessarily in the true, paramount interest of the American people which would be to limit nuclear proliferation. Secondly, it seems that --despite many fine words over the many years history of the Iran nuke endeavor-- the Washington policymakers did not want to stop the Iranian Bomb project. They want Iran to have the Bomb.

- - - - - - - - - -Barry Rubin on Wikileaks and the Iranian Bomb [here]David Horowitz, editor of the Jerusalem Post on Obama's duplicity concerning the Iranian Bomb Project [here]Judith Apter Klinghoffer covers disappointment among Western "leftists" that Arabs too opposed the Iranian Bomb [here]. She also argued that "Obama lied when he pretended that he needed to kick Israel to convince Arabs to support his anti-Iran policy" [here].12-8-2010 Tariq al-Mohayed admits that the wikileaks revelations about Arab opposition to the Iranian Bomb Project were true [here]. He calls them: "leaked US diplomatic cables."12-15-2010 Martin Kramer brings a lecture from two years ago explaining that Arab states feared an Iranian Bomb [here].

About

The world swims in lies. Who doesn't know that? Even the dupes are told there are lies about. We aim to dispel the fog of lies, especially about Israel, like our prophets of old and our poets like Yehudah haLevi.
We feature historic sources, documents, excerpts from the classics, etc.
How shall I render my vows and my bonds, While yet
Zion lieth beneath the fetter of Edom, and I in Arab chains?
The false prophets cry Peace, and there is no peace.
A new post every 2 or 3 days.

About Me

צלום דבורה בת יהודה לייב ז''ל
Dvoyreh bas Yehudah Leyb, Eliyahu's mother. My own photo will have to await more peaceful times.
I have been an observer of
the human comedy, and the human tragedy for many years.